P1: Restate conclusion and state that the argument is not logically sound because it is based on assumptions that are not supported by strong evidence. Say it needs to present evidence that fill the gap between the assumptions and the conclusion. (This will be fleshed out into maybe 4 or 5 sentences). Should I briefly list the assumptions I will blow holes in here?
P2: State assumption 1, blow it apart and give examples/ways it could be improved upon to support the conclusion.
P3: Assumption 2, same process.
P4: Assumption 3.
P5: Restate conclusion and why its not valid (brief re-cap of assumptions). Then re-state (again, briefly) what it needs to be logically sound.
I feel like this is similar to what most people do. I plan on using good word choice, connectors for each paragraph and good grammar/spelling.
Any and all advice/comments is greatly appreciated.
P2: State assumption 1, blow it apart and give examples/ways it could be improved upon to support the conclusion.
P3: Assumption 2, same process.
P4: Assumption 3.
P5: Restate conclusion and why its not valid (brief re-cap of assumptions). Then re-state (again, briefly) what it needs to be logically sound.
I feel like this is similar to what most people do. I plan on using good word choice, connectors for each paragraph and good grammar/spelling.
Any and all advice/comments is greatly appreciated.
